Andhra Pradesh Court August 2010 Judgments

B. Bhaskar Reddy Vs. Bommireddy Pattabhi Rami Reddy Per L.Rs., and Oth ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

This civil revision petition, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, is directed against an order made in O.S.No. 10 of 2002 on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur, Nellore District dated 21.6.2007, where under, the objection taken by the learned counsel for the defendants that the agreement of sale sought to be marked requires to be impounded and unless and until it is impounded it cannot be marked and admitted in evidence, was upheld. Petitioner is the plaintiff. Respondents are the defendants. Plaintiff laid suit in O.S. No. 10 of 2002 on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur for specific performance of agreement of sale and delivery of possession. When the agreement of sale dated 4.5.1998 was sought to be marked, learned counsel for the defendants objected for the same, stating that the said document is inadmissible in evidence and stamp duty and penalty are required to be paid. After hearing both the parties, Court below passed the following order on 2...

Kedarisetti Atmaram Vs. N. Seetharamaraju

Court: Andhra Pradesh

1.This Civil Revision Petition, under Article 227 of the constitution of India, is directed against the order dated 24.08.2007 passed in E.P.No.86 of 2005 in O.S.No.71 of 2002 by the Senior Civil Judge, Tadepalligudem, whereby and whereunder, the objections filed by the petitioner herein in the form of counter for execution of the decree were overruled. 2. While the petitioner herein was facing insolvency proceedings in I.P. No. 14 of 1990 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Tanuku, the respondent herein, who is also the second respondent in the said insolvency proceedings, filed O.S. No. 71 of 1992 on the file of the Subordinate Judge, Tadepalligudem, for specific performance basing on the agreement of sale. The petitioner herein was set ex parte and an ex parte decree was passed in the said suit on 17.09.1992. The petitioner herein filed an application to set aside the ex parte decree passed against him. He also filed an application to condone the delay of 278 days in filing the sa...

Sri Manganellore Veeraraghavan Vs. Sri S Chakrapani

Court: Andhra Pradesh

The action of respondent No.3 in allowing respondent No.5 to remain in fray for election to the office of Sarpanch, Illupuru Gram Panchayat, Sullurpet Mandal, Nellore District, is called in question in this writ petition by the petitioner.The brief background leading to the filing of this writ petition is as follows:Respondent No.1 issued Notification dated 09.07.2006 for holding elections to the Gram Panchayats in the Nellore District. Illupuru Gram Panchayat, Sullurpet Mandal is one such Gram Panchayat covered by the said notification. Respondent No.3 was appointed as election officer for conducting elections for the said Gram Panchayat. As per the notified schedule, 19.07.2006 was fixed as last date for receipt of nominations, 20.07.2006 as publication of valid list of nominations after scrutiny, 23.07.2006 as withdrawal of nominations and 06.08.2006 was fixed for poll, if need be.The petitioner, respondent No.5 and five others filed their nominations. Respondent No.5 filed two sets...

Yadava Kamala Bai Vs. Bijjam Venkata Subbamma and Another

Court: Andhra Pradesh

The petitioner filed O.S.No.350 of 2002 in the Court of Principal Junior Civil Judge, Proddatur against the 1st respondent for recovery of a sum of about Rs.87,000/-. She filed I.A.No.1033 of 2002, under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 C.P.C. and got attached before judgment, an item of immovable property, viz., a house. The suit was decreed ex parte on 02-09-2008. When the suit was pending, the attached property was brought to sale by the State Bank of India, from whom the 1st respondent is said to have obtained loan by mortgaging the property. After adjusting the loan amount, the bank kept with it, a sum of about Rs.1,00,000/-.The 2nd respondent filed O.S.No.27 of 2007 in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur, against the 1st respondent for recovery of amount. He filed I.A.No.102 of 2007, under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 C.P.C., for attachment of the amount with the State Bank of India, and an order of attachment was passed. The petitioner filed I.A.No.420 of 2007, under Rule 8 of Order XXXVIII ...

Sri Lakshmi Housing Enterprise Vs. Haji Begum and Others

Court: Andhra Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2011(NOC)183(AP)

The petitioner filed O.S.No.622 of 2006 in the Court of V Additional Senior Civil Judge (Fast Track Court), Ranga Reddy District for the relief of specific performance of an agreement of sale dated 14.03.1992 in respect of the suit schedule property and for the relief of perpetual injunction. The trial of the suit commenced and he sought to file the original of the agreement into the Court. An objection was raised by the respondents as to the admissibility of the document, on the ground that it was not properly stamped. According to the respondents, the agreement is required to be stamped as per Article 47-A of Schedule 1-A to the Indian Stamp Act. The petitioner pleaded that there is no recital as to delivery of possession in the agreement and as such, it is not at all liable to be stamped. The trial Court did not agree with the petitioner and through its order, dated 18.04.2010, it directed the petitioner to pay the required stamp duty and penalty as provided for under the Indian Sta...

Yenuganti Tata Rao and Others Vs. the State,

Court: Andhra Pradesh

1.This revision petition is filed against so-called remand Judgment dated 28.06.2010 passed by the Principal Sessions Judge, Prakasam, Ongole setting aside order of acquittal passed by the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class, Kanigiri in C.C.No.57 of 2003 directing the trial court for fresh disposal according to law, after framing separate charges against A-4 and A-5 instead of combined charge and permitting both the parties to lead further evidence if any. 2. In the trial court, A-1 to A-3 faced charges under Sections 406, 420, 471 and 120-B IPC and A-4 and A-5 faced charge under Section 468 IPC. It is alleged that A-1 to A-3 borrowed loan from Prakasam District Cooperative Central Bank Limited, Pambru to establish bricks units on the strength of fabricated pattadar pass book and fabricated title deed books Exs.P-6, P-12, P- 13, P-29, P-30 and P-42 inspite of A-1 to A-3 not having any rights in the lands shown in those books and that A-4 as person in-charge of the bank gave 'no due...

Anant Prasad Ganeriwal Vs. the Govt. of A.P., Rep. by Its Secretary to ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the 4th respondent - Assistant Commissioner of Endowments, Hyderabad - in not delivering the physical possession of the land belonging to Sri Sitaram Maharaj Samsthan to the petitioner as directed by the 3rd respondent - Deputy Commissioner of Endowments - by order dated 11.4.2001 in O.A.No.36 of 1986 is arbitrary and illegal.It is stated that the petitioner was recognized as the sole hereditary trustee of Sri Sitharam Maharaj Samsthan, Sitharambagh, Hyderabad (hereinafter referred to as 'the temple') by order dated 20.11.1956 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments (Registrar of Public Trust, Amaravathi). Subsequent to the enactment of A.P. Charitable and Hindu Religious Institutions and Endowments Act, 1966 (for short, 'Act 17 of 1966'), the petitioner was recognised as the sole hereditary trustee of the temple by order dated 20.03.1968 in O.A.No.19 of 1967 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Endowments, Hy...

Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams, Tirupati Vs. M/S Shree Distributors, R ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

The respondent filed O.S.No.1557 of 2006 against the petitioner in the Court of Additional Judge, City Small Causes Court-cum-VI Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for recovery of Rs.1,08,042/-. The suit claim arises out of a contract between the parties. The petitioner invited tenders for supply of Art Paper Material for the year 2004-05, and the tender submitted by the respondent was accepted on 30-04-2004. Material worth Rs.24,01,373/- was supplied by the respondent, and the entire amount, except a sum of Rs.1,08,042/-, was paid by the petitioner. The said amount was withheld, on the ground that some quantity, supplied by the respondent, did not accord with specifications. On receipt of summons in the suit, the petitioner filed written-statement. Apart from denying its liability to pay the amount, the petitioner raised an objection, as to the territorial jurisdiction of the trial Court. It has also filed I.A.No.174 of 2008, under Rule 2(ii)(a) of Order XIV C.P.C., with...

The United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. M. Premender Reddy

Court: Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Hyderabad

Oral Order :(Per Smt. M.Shreesha, Honble Member) Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.68/08 on the file of District Forum, Adilabad, the opp.party preferred this appeal. The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant is a dealer of Bharath Petroleum Corporation Limited having retail outlet at Dasnapur, Adilabad under the name and style of Tirumala Filling Station and he was also owner of lorry tanker and has bulk POL transportation contract with the said company. On 24.3.2006 at about 2.30 p.m. complainants lorry bearing no.AP-01/V-0225 carrying speed petrol and diesel while proceeding towards Adilabad from Hyderabad dashed a stationed lorry in front of R.R.C.Venture on N.H.No.7 as a result of which the lorry tankers first compartment body was cracked and speed petrol in it leaked out and the vehicle was also damaged. On a complaint given by one Pampiri Nagesh, police of Toopran registered a case against the driver of lorry tanker of complainant and issued F.I.R. No....

Smt.Osuri Venkata Subbamma and ors. Vs. the Land Acquisition Officer a ...

Court: Andhra Pradesh

1.This is an appeal filed by the appellants/claimants aggrieved by the order of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada dated 06.08.1999 in O.P.54/1991.2. It is stated that an extent of Ac.3.12 cents of land situated in Suryaraopet village of Kakinada town was notified for acquisition. Pursuant to the draft notification issued under Sec. 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") dated 05.02.1977, only Ac.2.83 cents of land situated in Sy.Nos.123/1 and 123/2A of Suryaraopet village, Kakinada town was acquired by the Government for the purpose of providing house sites to the weaker sections. The Land Acquisition Officer passed award No.1/78, dated 03.07.1978 awarding compensation @Rs.20,000/- per acre. The claimants received the compensation under protest and requested the Land Acquisition Officer to refer the matter under Sec.18 of the Act to the competent Civil Court. On reference being made, the reference Court took the reference as O.P.N...